Share this story

When Apple TV+ launched in November 2019, it was the first of four major video-streaming services that would launch between then and May of the next year. It was also one of the riskiest of the set, coming from a company that had zero experience in creating entertainment. With the service’s 90-day mark fast approaching, it’s time to take Apple TV+’s temperature.

And, yes, it’s ice-cold. But is Apple TV+ really as dead in the water as it appears? And what do we expect for the rest of its first year?

So many devices, so little excitement

From the jump, Apple seemed an odd addition to a lineup of players, all of whom were already in the content-creation business. Apple has never been interested in producing its own fare so much as using others’ content to promote its closed hardware ecosystem. But that hardware component was Apple’s claim to enter the derby. The company boasts two billion devices in pockets around the world. If just 10 percent of those users signed up after getting a free year of Apple TV+ with the purchase of a device, it would give the company 200 million subscribers worldwide, dwarfing Netflix’s 158 million.

But 10 percent may be an ambitious reach. Disney+ (launched two weeks after Apple TV+) or NBC Peacock and HBO Max (starting in April and May of 2020 respectively) have or will arrive with vast libraries of movies and TV series, highlighting their family-friendly fare to bolster their appeal for subscription dollars. (Disney+ is the most obvious one aiming for “family” right now, but both NBC and HBO have focused on kiddie offerings on their upcoming services as well.) Apple TV+, by contrast, launched with just four shows, all brand-new originals targeting an adult-level audience, with nothing as backfill that might appeal to an all-ages crowd.

Second seasons already?

Apple TV+ was also run over by Disney+’s far more successful launch with The Mandalorian. The first-ever Star Wars live-action series sucked the oxygen out of the streaming room, leaving Apple struggling to catch anyone’s attention with follow-up shows like Servant, despite a stellar cast and M. Night Shyamalan’s name plastered all over it. (The lawsuit that followed Servant’s first season isn’t helping either.) Perhaps the most damning issue is that Apple did not build itself to be a nimble player, despite the light load of shows. Convinced it had the next big things, the company greenlighted second seasons of all of the launch shows beforehand, essentially committing itself to these vaguely dud titles for at least another year.

Now the service is launching what is inarguably its best series to date, Little America, from The Big Sick writers Kumail Nanjiani and Emily V. Gordon along with Lee Eisenberg of The Office fame. The docu-series is “inspired by true stories featured in Epic Magazine” of the immigrant experience in modern America. For the first time on Apple TV+, all 10 episodes will drop at once, instead of a weekly release schedule, in the hopes of getting it more attention.

But once again, the timing is terrible: Little America arrived all of 12 hours after Peacock announced a free, ad-supported tier for its streaming service, making it a less-expensive option than Apple TV+ at $4.99 per month.

Further Reading

What Apple TV+ needs now is a return to its parent company’s comfort zone: the hardware. Apple TV+ has its own “free” tier: a year of service to anyone and everyone who buys or updates their Apple-branded product. The average upgrade timeframe for a smartphone is roughly every 2.8 years, and in the case of Apple products, that timeframe can be even longer. But iPhone and iPad users are likely to do it sooner if Apple rolls out a must-have product. MacRumors suggests this is the year the company goes 5G and all-OLED. (We know why 2019 wasn’t.) Apple’s Tim Cook can use the company’s regularly scheduled product-reveal events to stir consumers into purchases. That would put Apple TV+ in front of them at no charge; it could be enough to let shows like Little America catch on via word of mouth.

HBO Max’s loss is...

Meanwhile, Cook recently took the first step in righting this ship in the longer term: hiring Richard Plepler. After 25 years with HBO, Plepler, who had a hand in greenlighting everything from Game of Thrones to Succession, left the company in the wake of AT&T’s acquisition of parent company Time Warner. Cook snapped him up in one of the first significant entertainment news announcements of the new year, and it’s the first good news Apple TV+ has had since before it launched. The streaming service will take a while to turn around, but there is hope for it yet.

In the meantime, 2020 is going to be a long, hard slog, filled with dodgy-looking shows like the forthcoming Mythic Quest: Raven’s Banquet. (One can only pray the show is better than the trailer.) Here’s hoping a free year with purchase/upgrade will slowly build the base, so when content worth subscribing shows up, Mac, iPad, and iPhone users are there to start streaming.

This article has been updated to reflect studies about average users' hardware upgrade cycles.

Share this story

267 Reader Comments

Gotta say my biggest gripe with Apple TV+ is that it doesn’t work on anything connected to my TV. Sure I can run it on my iPad, my iPhone, probably my iMac And MacBook, but none of these connect to my TV.

Connecting an iPad or iPhone to a TV just requires an Apple Lightning Digital AV Adapter which costs about fifty pounds - I bought one to play Minecraft on the 55" screen rather than craning my neck over the tablet.

It is a little annoying that Apple TV+ requires Catalina and my perfectly reasonable prime-of-life 2009 iMac is supposedly too old to run Catalina.

You're giving away a service subscription to boost numbers. You then inhibit them joining by not supporting their existing devices (including your iMac here )

Although I realise Roku is huge in the US, it's not so big in the UK. Android is in about 1 in 10 TVs and countless pre-existing STBs, all of which support HD and many (most?) capable of 4K video. I can buy a Roku for 30 pounds, but the overlap between a Roku and my pre-existing NVidia Shield TV is pretty much 100%. The only thing it seems to support that isn't on Android is ATV+. Similarly a 50 pound adapter to watch one subscription service seems a massive waste, not to mention inconvenient.

Totally with you on the Catalina headache too ... I can't install Catalina on my 2016 iMac (due to some essential 32-bit apps) so that means no Apple Arcade or Apple TV+ despite the device being more than capable

What is the deal with so many people claiming that you can only watch the shows on one kind of device.

It works through a web browser, comes preinstalled on all the big name smart TVs, Roku, Fire TV, PC, AND all the Apple devices.

Gotta say my biggest gripe with Apple TV+ is that it doesn’t work on anything connected to my TV. Sure I can run it on my iPad, my iPhone, probably my iMac And MacBook, but none of these connect to my TV.

Connecting an iPad or iPhone to a TV just requires an Apple Lightning Digital AV Adapter which costs about fifty pounds - I bought one to play Minecraft on the 55" screen rather than craning my neck over the tablet.

It is a little annoying that Apple TV+ requires Catalina and my perfectly reasonable prime-of-life 2009 iMac is supposedly too old to run Catalina.

You're giving away a service subscription to boost numbers. You then inhibit them joining by not supporting their existing devices (including your iMac here )

Although I realise Roku is huge in the US, it's not so big in the UK. Android is in about 1 in 10 TVs and countless pre-existing STBs, all of which support HD and many (most?) capable of 4K video. I can buy a Roku for 30 pounds, but the overlap between a Roku and my pre-existing NVidia Shield TV is pretty much 100%. The only thing it seems to support that isn't on Android is ATV+. Similarly a 50 pound adapter to watch one subscription service seems a massive waste, not to mention inconvenient.

Totally with you on the Catalina headache too ... I can't install Catalina on my 2016 iMac (due to some essential 32-bit apps) so that means no Apple Arcade or Apple TV+ despite the device being more than capable

What is the deal with so many people claiming that you can only watch the shows on one kind of device.

It works through a web browser, comes preinstalled on all the big name smart TVs, Roku, Fire TV, PC, AND all the Apple devices.

Trolls. Side note IIRC the only smart TVs with support right now are Samsung smart TVs but I believe that is just a timeline thing. Getting support for a new service takes time. Eventually it will be in everything. There already is enough non-Apple support in everything from Samsung TVs to Roku to Amazon fire devices that any claim of Apple only or needing to watch it on a phone is nonsense.

Launched November 1st, three months later, still advertising the same shows they launched the service with. As a Sci-Fi fan, For All Mankind was the only show worth watching, but still not a great show.

I haven't checked that one out. I'm slowly watching See when on the elliptical (jury is till out on that show for me). Honestly, the interface is the most annoying thing. It's like they took itunes (in the way in could collect all your entertainment files in one place) and moved the concept to your streaming collection. Except I go to prime or netflix and not only watch/finish a show on my list but browse in general.

My biggest gripe is that I had a hard time telling which shows were "free" and which had rental fees. I doubt I will pay for this once my trial is up. It's too isolated a offering. I could see this service, though, turning into a rental hub...kind of like Vudu or MoviesAnywhere, except Apple have the cash to keep the lights on until they can get enough rental traffic to turn a profit. I could easily see myself ignoring Prime rentals and using an Apple TV rental service if they make the handoff between hitting "rent" from a handheld device and watching on a big screen easier (1st world problem)...

What the hell, this was one the shadiest articles I read on the otherwise great Ars Technica.

What bit of pathetic shade was this?

"With iPhones and iPads built to hit a two-year planned obsolescence, the average user upgrades every 2.8 years."

This "planned obsolescence" is based on what, exactly? Please tell me, as I'm currently using a 2016 SE with the latest software, and next year will still be using the latest software, while getting a new battery with warranty service from the OEM, without any hassle or waste of time, and will still have new OS versions and/or security updates for a few more years. What competing devices offer something comparable?

Apple TV+ doesn't seem great, but it's also just one of the lesser relevant services of the most successful public traded company of the planet that's mostly product driven. All of your potentially legitimate criticisms of Apple TV+ are buried on the pathetic, ignorant "planned obsolescence" shade. Let's even ignore the competitors.

In fact your shade is so out of touch with reality that one has to question who the fuck are you to be writing for this otherwise informed publication. Ars has to address this. It's unacceptable.

Wow, Apple customers/shareholders are really angry. The point you are criticizing is rather peripheral to the article story. Similar critical points about Android, Google, Samsung etc. are published by Ars daily. Apple may and should be criticized too. Not really a big deal.

Apple SHOULDN'T be criticized. Yes planned obsolescents, lack of long term support, and OEMs trying to push consumers to a wasteful two year upgrade cycle is bad. Apple doesn't do that. They provide support for at least five years. They are the model that in an ideal world all OEMs would meet.

Planned obsolescence of Apple products is not a new topic. It has been raised by Apple fans often. And you know very well that, in case of Apple, people are not complaining about the long term support but about certain design choices and changes that encourage people to update often, such as using small RAM, strategically withholding certain features etc. I am not arguing any of it. I am just saying that to pretend that the author came up with this point out of nowhere is to be disingenuous. It looks like people (AAPL shareholders, probably) are upset about the claim that Apple TV+ is failing and they attack the author as best as they can. The author is not alone in his thinking though. It's hard to find people (outside Apple fanbase) who are very enthusiastic about Apple TV+ yet. Here is a fresh example of another article that seemingly dismisses Apple TV+ as well: Only Disney+ Can Stop Netflix Now

I liked For All Mankind. I'm looking forward to a second season. I was actually surprised that I liked it.

I have been decidedly un-thrilled with all the other stuff. I am looking forward to Steven Spielberg's show. That might be good.

See was a huge disappointment.

It was my pick of the bunch, For All Mankind. The rest was, meh.

I'm curious how Apple aim to monetize and grow this service, as their current focus will not do much of anything on a global basis, so either they are content to chase the crowded US market with very middle-of-the-pack US oriented shows, or they have written off the rest of the planet (in addition to anyone without an Apple device in the US). It all makes for a very poor value proposition.

Compare that to Disney+ which will go global, and is almost certain to make Disney a bucket of cash in lots of currencies. Worse, compare it to Netflix which is working through a menu of international shows with wide appeal in addition to its English language slate.

Outside the US, at least, it still looks like Netflix and Disney+ will be the runaway winners.

One of the interesting things here is that apple may not be trying to disrupt the market just now or becoming a top player immediatly, consider the fact that they have the cash to keep this going for what 5-10 years? even at a loss while building the plataform to be robust enough so it becomes more of an incentive to enter or stay on the apple ecosystem. They could spend all that time being like hey if you get a new apple tv/iphone etc we'll throw in a year of this service, many will just forget to cancel it or it could become good enough by that time so people will actually want to keep it.

"With iPhones and iPads built to hit a two-year planned obsolescence, the average user upgrades every 2.8 years. "

I think you're confusing iPhones with Android phones. Perhaps you're just anti-iPhone, click-baiting, or trying to be dramatic? Otherwise, iPhone may not be perfect, but where the heck do you get a 2 year planned obsolescence?

iPhones get solid support for 5 years and new iOS releases have only 1-2 features that dont work on all devices. I expect far more from Ars Technica than such comments.

Imagine feeling this insecure about your Apple device ownership.

Like, accusing the writer of being anti-iPhone? Bashing Android phones? You expect more from Ars?

I'm curious how Apple aim to monetize and grow this service, as their current focus will not do much of anything on a global basis, so either they are content to chase the crowded US market with very middle-of-the-pack US oriented shows, or they have written off the rest of the planet (in addition to anyone without an Apple device in the US). It all makes for a very poor value proposition.

Compare that to Disney+ which will go global, and is almost certain to make Disney a bucket of cash in lots of currencies. Worse, compare it to Netflix which is working through a menu of international shows with wide appeal in addition to its English language slate.

Outside the US, at least, it still looks like Netflix and Disney+ will be the runaway winners.

Huh? One of Apple TV+'s advantages is 100% internally developed content without other licensing. They should be able to release everything worldwide on day one.

Compare to Netflix which is notorious for it's catalog varying around the world. Or Disney which is running out or buying off all the limitations on existing licenses to the point that they don't yet have all their own content.

Apple hasn't announced any non-English first content but (so far as I can tell) everything they have right now is dubbed, or subtitled, or both, in a lot of languages.

Yeah, this is one of the worst things Ars has published in a long time. I'm used to them publishing pieces by staff writers who don't know the first thing about film, television or drama. At least they're pop culture lite fan-girls and -boys writing for other fan-girls and -boys, reassuring them that the latest caped avenger origin story is awesome. But the added dose of thoroughly uninformed apple nerd rage is obvious click-bait. I didn't think Ars rolled that way.

As for the "planned obsolescence" thing, it's always been horse sh*t that apple nerd-ragers spout to make themselves feel better. Meanwhile, the five and ten year-old MacBook Pros in my household run just fine. So does the notorious launch day iPhone 6, still on its original battery at 87% health. Same for a 5S. Spout whatever nonsense you want; I'll be over here getting my money's worth out of my devices.

I got one year of TV+ as a freebie (bought an TV 4K). I finished For All Mankind, Elephant Queen and Ghostwriter. Have watched 2 episodes of Little America. Apart from the occasional (unnecessary) foul words in For All Mankind, they were quite good. Ghostwriter was a little childish, as expected. I watched the early parts of See, Servant, Dickenson and Truth be Told but, sadly, none of them are for family viewing. I’m hopeful that future shows will offer more for families.

Disney+ is due to launch here in Ireland at the end of March, so it will definitely get a look!

"With iPhones and iPads built to hit a two-year planned obsolescence, the average user upgrades every 2.8 years. "

I think you're confusing iPhones with Android phones. Perhaps you're just anti-iPhone, click-baiting, or trying to be dramatic? Otherwise, iPhone may not be perfect, but where the heck do you get a 2 year planned obsolescence?

iPhones get solid support for 5 years and new iOS releases have only 1-2 features that dont work on all devices. I expect far more from Ars Technica than such comments.

Imagine feeling this insecure about your Apple device ownership.

Like, accusing the writer of being anti-iPhone? Bashing Android phones? You expect more from Ars?

Maybe your mileage just varies? Either way, get a grip.

Let's be honest, 2 years is what most Android phones get. Some get 3. Some might get more. Sure, a 2013 moto g still gets app updates, and cost a third of a flagship, but still has major flaws still unpatched, and expensive phones don't mean much better. And maybe Android 10 will be able to fix more.

Some shows are decent (enjoying "Servant," currently), but Apple needs to put its service **ON EVERY DEVICE**... specifically, I'd rather be watching it on my Shield TV vs. anything else. But I can't. So, I'll probably opt out once my trial is over.

Glad I read the comments to just remind myself how mind-numbing the level of fanboyism for apple is on this website. You people really need to grow up. The amount of white knighting you do for a trillion dollar corporation is just cringe.

- Sent from my iPhone 11 Pro Max

I think you're being a bit selective; this comment threads seems to be a broad coalition of anti-Apple troll artists, people reacting in a perfectly reasonable way to the article's lowbrow aspirations, and people going somewhat overboard in direct attacks on the author.

Only the latter group has strayed into Apple fanboyism, and I'm not sure I'd put the net total in their side of the court.

For my money the article seems a bit ill-matched to the publication, and it's demonstrably false that Apple seeks to enforce obsolescence after two years. I haven't tried Apple TV+ because I already have enough to stream. Netflix has been a bit of a dirge recently, but there are some decent back catalogue titles on Prime and Hulu so that's not immediately a problem.

That said, with the loss in the last year of The OA, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt and Orange is the New Black, plus a third year of Stranger Things that I lost interest in halfway through I think I'm still only using Netflix through inertia, so it's possible a slot will open up. If this is the year that Apple finally stops providing software updates for my 6s (i.e. after five years of service) then possibly I'll end up with some sort of trial period, and see where it goes from there.

"With iPhones and iPads built to hit a two-year planned obsolescence, the average user upgrades every 2.8 years. "

I think you're confusing iPhones with Android phones. Perhaps you're just anti-iPhone or trying to be dramatic? Otherwise, iPhone may not be perfect, but where the heck do you get a 2 year planned obsolescence?

iPhones get solid support for 5 years and new iOS releases have only 1-2 features that dont work on all devices.

I heard they slow down your old phones? Do they still do that?

They clock down the device's SoC when the battery can't output the necessary current to feed the SoC. It's up to the user to keep such feature active. Not doing so can result in an unexpected shut down, as it happens to a % of smartphones. It isn't brand dependent.

It only ever impacts defective or warn out batteries. And you can have a 5 year old iPhone and Apple will happily replace the battery with a new one + warranty. So they are best in class by a huge margin as far as support and fighting against planned obsolescence. Also, your 5 year old iPhone will be running the latest software and get a few more years of security updates.

The shade in this article is pathetic and uninformed, just like a user that frequents these comment sections still coming up with the "apple slows down" shit.

iPhones have by far the most potent SoC on the market, so they also have a lot of headroom there to manage.

Anyway all of this affected more smaller smartphones with smaller batteries, because they had to feed the same SoC as the big boys, but the maximum current output of smaller batteries was always closer to the necessary current to feed the SoC, and smaller batteries most of the time mean more frequent charging, quicker cycles, reduced life. But we all know that already.

You can’t seriously already ask for second seasons ?!It’s free for one year then 4.99$\months (less with a yearly subscription)... it is not that expensive for the shows which are imp honestly quite good. I still think Apple launched it too late (as they did Apple Music even if it turned out good at the end) but i am giving them a shot

"With iPhones and iPads built to hit a two-year planned obsolescence, the average user upgrades every 2.8 years. "

I think you're confusing iPhones with Android phones. Perhaps you're just anti-iPhone, click-baiting, or trying to be dramatic? Otherwise, iPhone may not be perfect, but where the heck do you get a 2 year planned obsolescence?

iPhones get solid support for 5 years and new iOS releases have only 1-2 features that dont work on all devices. I expect far more from Ars Technica than such comments.

Imagine feeling this insecure about your Apple device ownership.

Like, accusing the writer of being anti-iPhone? Bashing Android phones? You expect more from Ars?

Maybe your mileage just varies? Either way, get a grip.

Let's be honest, 2 years is what most Android phones get. Some get 3. Some might get more. Sure, a 2013 moto g still gets app updates, and cost a third of a flagship, but still has major flaws still unpatched, and expensive phones don't mean much better. And maybe Android 10 will be able to fix more.

But no, 2 years isn't what Apple plans.

This is patently false. Android flagships might get 2 years, but to say "most Android phones" get 2 years is a straight up lie. I have purchased Android phones that came with a 1-2 year old version of Android when new, and never received a further update after that.

"With iPhones and iPads built to hit a two-year planned obsolescence, the average user upgrades every 2.8 years. "

I think you're confusing iPhones with Android phones. Perhaps you're just anti-iPhone, click-baiting, or trying to be dramatic? Otherwise, iPhone may not be perfect, but where the heck do you get a 2 year planned obsolescence?

iPhones get solid support for 5 years and new iOS releases have only 1-2 features that dont work on all devices. I expect far more from Ars Technica than such comments.

Imagine feeling this insecure about your Apple device ownership.

Like, accusing the writer of being anti-iPhone? Bashing Android phones? You expect more from Ars?

Maybe your mileage just varies? Either way, get a grip.

Let's be honest, 2 years is what most Android phones get. Some get 3. Some might get more. Sure, a 2013 moto g still gets app updates, and cost a third of a flagship, but still has major flaws still unpatched, and expensive phones don't mean much better. And maybe Android 10 will be able to fix more.

But no, 2 years isn't what Apple plans.

This is patently false. Android flagships might get 2 years, but to say "most Android phones" get 2 years is a straight up lie. I have purchased Android phones that came with a 1-2 year old version of Android when new, and never received a further update after that.

Stop projecting what flagships get onto the entire Android world.

Updates or upgrades? That and I doubt you bought anything in the past couple of years to even properly gauge that.This tablet I'm typing on got three years. Even cheap phones from cricket got 2 years of security updates, even if they were quarterly.I mean, just the other day you scoffed at the idea that chromeos was a success but OK.

The Morning Show was only mediocre at first. By the end of the season it was spectacular. I feel like almost all of the mediocre reviews were people who never watched the whole season especially considering almost every review came before the season was even halfway done.

It’s the only TV show on Apple TV+ worth it for me. The Elephant Queen was also very good but not a series. Since we buy a new phone for someone in the family at least once a year (6 phone owning teen/adults) - we will probably keep getting a year for free. I won’t pay for just one show.

I've enjoyed For All Man Kind, The Morning Show, and Little America. The first two are goodish but I think Little America is a slam dunk (although I haven't finished all the episodes). Truth Be Told is meh but I did finish the season anyway. I'm hoping that Mythic Quest turns out to be good although I have my doubts.

Overall, Apple TV+ is nice so far. I have more to watch on it than the one show I'm interested in on Disney+. At this point there isn't much on Netflix that I'm following. There's just too much Netflix original content for me and a lot of it seems to be not so great. I'll buy a month of HBO Now/Go/whatever it is as needed. If/When I don't have a free trial of Apple TV+, I'll just buy a month as needed to binge whatever seasons are there. Finally, it's hard to get rid of Hulu because that's how we watch anything that isn't a streaming original.

I wouldn't consider Apple TV+ to be a flop. That's just my own personal opinion. It's not the weakest in the pack for what I want to watch. Honestly, I think Apple TV+ is more about driving and support the ecosystem that sells hardware. So, I don't think it has to stand up to Netflix/Hulu/HBO/Peacock/Disney+.

It’s funny to see people getting in such an uproar over the planned obsolescence jab in the initial article. Sure, iOS devices have generally better long term-support than Android, but that’s not a high bar to beat. And I say this as a still kicking iPhone 6S owner. Yeah, 4 years is great in the mobile world, but it’s very likely that said 6S will be on the chopping block next year for iOS 14, despite it being still running perfectly fine today. And most people will say that was plenty enough, but that’s only because we’re used to mobile devices having pathetic lifespans so 5 years seems like forever, but really, it isn’t.

Meanwhile on the non-mobile side where expectations for hardware lifespan are significantly higher, their support period for old Macs has been getting increasingly worse, while alternative operating systems have no such artificial cut-offs, which should be a downright embarrassment to Apple, and yet here we are.

(And let’s not even get started on the software planned obsolescence of killing 32-bit support)

I'm curious how Apple aim to monetize and grow this service, as their current focus will not do much of anything on a global basis, so either they are content to chase the crowded US market with very middle-of-the-pack US oriented shows, or they have written off the rest of the planet (in addition to anyone without an Apple device in the US). It all makes for a very poor value proposition.

Compare that to Disney+ which will go global, and is almost certain to make Disney a bucket of cash in lots of currencies. Worse, compare it to Netflix which is working through a menu of international shows with wide appeal in addition to its English language slate.

Outside the US, at least, it still looks like Netflix and Disney+ will be the runaway winners.

Huh? One of Apple TV+'s advantages is 100% internally developed content without other licensing. They should be able to release everything worldwide on day one.

Compare to Netflix which is notorious for it's catalog varying around the world. Or Disney which is running out or buying off all the limitations on existing licenses to the point that they don't yet have all their own content.

Apple hasn't announced any non-English first content but (so far as I can tell) everything they have right now is dubbed, or subtitled, or both, in a lot of languages.

The economics of streaming don't work (charge peanuts, spend billions) without the largest possible scale so you can amortize content costs. So we can all assume that any successful major streaming platform of the Netflix-Amazon-Disney-Hulu-Apple-HBO Max type will be global or will just get out of the business entirely and sell their assets to a global competitor. We're just seeing the messy transition process now.

Dunno about Peacock. if they're going free/ad-based maybe they just stay domestic. Are they going to build a global ad network like YouTube did? Big job.

I mean it's pretty obvious to me that Apple only intends this service to be an "added value" to their ecosystem. They're not really competing with the likes of Netflix et al and they don't intend to. I'm pretty sure they don't even expect to get a lot of paid subscribers outside of the free years that come with new Apple devices. It's not meant to be a profitable venture, just as the iTunes music store allegedly never was.

This article is trying too hard to paint it as a failure because the author does not understand why Apple made this service in the first place.

Apple is an aging company with few new countries to exploit for future growth. It is widely known that their future growth relies on succes in the digital services world (iCloud/iTunes/Apple TV+) are all efforts to further the revenue that comes with running their own ecosystem. The idea that Apple is not trying to make money off of Apple TV+ or iTunes is as unhinged as many are claiming this article is.

I'm quite happy with Apple TV+. I have 12 months free and at this stage I'm likely to keep it when I have to start paying.

For All Mankind has been quite good so far. It's not perfect but as a space buff it's been a fascinating look at what could have been. When I saw the water in that final scene I knew exactly what was coming and I was not disappointed.

See was much better then the reviews implied. I also just realised that the author of this article wrote the Ars See review. Given the sub-par quality of this article the quality of that review makes more sense now. After watching See I wondered whether or not the reviewer had actually watched it.

The Morning Show was also quite good. It struggled a bit in some episodes but the final few episodes was really some powerful drama.

Although I'm still genuinely curious as to whether or not the 12 months free came from my Samsung TV purchase or from updating my iPhone in February last year. Does the Apple TV App built into a Samsung TV count as an Apple device for the purposes of the 12 months free?

I mean it's pretty obvious to me that Apple only intends this service to be an "added value" to their ecosystem. They're not really competing with the likes of Netflix et al and they don't intend to. I'm pretty sure they don't even expect to get a lot of paid subscribers outside of the free years that come with new Apple devices. It's not meant to be a profitable venture, just as the iTunes music store allegedly never was.

This article is trying too hard to paint it as a failure because the author does not understand why Apple made this service in the first place.

Apple is an aging company with few new countries to exploit for future growth. It is widely known that their future growth relies on succes in the digital services world (iCloud/iTunes/Apple TV+) are all efforts to further the revenue that comes with running their own ecosystem. The idea that Apple is not trying to make money off of Apple TV+ or iTunes is as unhinged as many are claiming this article is.

Apple is surely trying to make money, but they can afford not to for a while, just as long as their devices are relevant.And they can afford to botch a launch or two, as they can spin up new interest for a revamped service by bundling it with some aggressive new hardware launch - again, just as long as they can spin up interest for their devices.

Is there a service which has a very large back-catalogue of TV shows and movies (so, giving the benefits and convenience of torrents, but legal and in consistent quality)? We have Netflix and cable, but searches of its catalogues usually return empty. We watch very little TV, but I'm willing to pay (per view or per month) for having the ability to (re-)watch any of the old favourite TV-shows or movies.

For TV back catalog, Hulu, CBS All Access, Disney+ all have pretty significant offerings. But they're all limited to one or two production houses. Britbox is more of a "greatest hits", but still has a pretty decent catalog in the process. So none of the preceding will approach the convenience of torrents, because they're siloed by company. For movie back catalog, I don't really have a feel of where to go.

If you're willing to pay per-item rather than an all-you-can-watch monthly service, you can get pretty close to torrent-like convenience: iTunes Store and Amazon streaming both have just about all the old shows that are available for streaming, it seems like, even including a few of the items that are otherwise exclusive to competitors.

Apple's typical MO when lauching a new product is to start modestly and iterate at their own pace; cf. iPhone, Apple Watch. That said, it would appear that they're aiming for something different from Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Disney+, given the much smaller catalog of original content. I'm currently enjoying my free subscription, but it remains to be seen whether or not I'll continue after that.

Based on my trials of AppleTV + and Disney +, I quite disagree with this article.

I did not have high expectations after the (I now feel unfair) drubbing that The Morning Show got, but was interested to try it just to see for myself since it had a terrific cast, even though it wasn’t a concept that grabbed me. I found it excellent, much better than many high profile quality cable shows I have seen, and entirely in the big leagues, and I’m looking forward to the next season. Same story with For All Mankind. These series are gripping story telling, with quality writing, terrific acting, characters who behave like human beings, and great production values. For All Mankind does an amazing job creating an alternate history that is rooted in extremely accurate NASA and period detail, and just spiraling off of what one significant change could lead to.

I have simply not had the time to try the other adult series yet, but I am looking forward to it. And since there are more coming out next month, and the month after, etc., I have more in the pipeline than I will have time for.

Based on my experience, I suggest the people who didn’t try Apple TV+ shows because of concept might want to give them a few episodes. They might be as pleasantly surprised as I was.

Disney+ on the other hand, offers less to me. The children’s fare may be magical, but there are no children in this household so I cannot comment. The back catalog of Pixar, Star Wars, and Marvel are all things I have already seen and enjoyed, and I already own the ones I love most. Even at the very fair price for Disney+, I could simply rent one of these if I want to see it again, or buy if I find one I’ll want to see repeatedly over the years.

The Disney+ series that is new and most enjoyable to me is Pick of the Litter, which is a very well made and engaging short series continuing on with more in the vein of the the excellent feature documentary of the same name from last year. See it, if you are into dogs and involved in dog training. But this is a limited run of short episodes. I will admit that I would watch season after season, because the topic is dear to me. (Are you listening, Disney?)

The big new series, The Mandalorian, is an enjoyable diversion, at least after the first episode, because it has high production values, is Star Wars, and Baby Yoda is simply inherently cute, without requiring (or receiving) any above-and-beyond creative effort. Like puppy and kitten videos, Baby Yoda is inherently charming and watchable. (I watch some of Puppy Bowl every year, so I do not mean this as a bad thing. And I do very much appreciate the creative effort of the people who generate Baby Yoda. Pretty sure they didn’t just find one and turn a camera on it!) But again, this is a short series of short episodes, the writing, dialog, and many visuals are highly derivative and generally uninventive, although it looks great. Often the characters literally speak in movie cliches from a variety of genres strung together. After the first episode, I let a couple of weeks go by before watching again, and was not sure I would. I have watched it all, I admit, because Baby Yoda and Star Wars Universe, and sometimes a 38 minute cuteness break is desperately needed. Because of the scripts, the overall quality is no match for the two Apple TV+ series I have seen, and I am not as interested in seeing more. Again, I freely admit I will watch more when it returns.

I guess I am simply saying the I do not at all agree that the quantity and quality of original adult Disney+ fare blows Apple TV+ out of the water. At the moment I have seen twice as many hours of Apple TV fare that I found excellent, as Disney+ shows I found enjoyable, and I have a bigger backlog of adult original content yet to try on Apple TV+.

If they ever include the free year with macbooks, i’d never have to pay for a subscription.

Well, they included it with the mbp I just bought...

Ditto for my MacBook Air.

I finally got around to activating it last night and wow. That ATV app is one chaotic mess to parse, although today I did take a liking to the "Up Next" list it collated from across different apps, although it was far from complete even for the apps it was pulling from.